The Washington critic., 1887-03-05
WASHINGTON, MARCH ), 1897.
THE RETALIATION POLICY.


As arbitration which is not com.
pusory in Its decisions cannot be ef.
fectivc in its results as applied to the
settlement of controversies between
workingmen and their employees, so
retaliation, being game which two
can play at, Is bound TO prove equally
Ineffective In the settlement of disputes
of an international character. If one
party to quarrel could control Il
board Of arbitration or enforce the
operation OF a reialiilory law, in its
own favor exclusively, all woul be
well with the party enjoying such M
just advantage; but This In the nature
OF things cannot be,
Retaliation, Instead of inviting cin.
cession, naturally enough proYoScs
retaliation. licnca we have always
doubted the eXpedicncy of adopting
any measures that, instead Of eYpc.
diting an adjustment of existing diff.
ferences between the United states aud
Canada, tended rather to their pro.
longatlon.
The legislation Just had by Congress
on this subject simply authorizes the
President, in case the Dominion per.
sists in doing certain things, to do
certain other things. 1t announces t.
Canada, In substance, that unless her
customs officers aud revenue cruisers
cease to commit outrages upon the
rights Of American fishermen the
al, 10, -,
Canadian commerce. 1t does not put
stop to the outragcs, 1t suggests no
practical means for their prevention; 1t
vindicates in no wise the honor of the
American flag,
The retaliation policy so brayely and
vigorously advocated upon the floors of
Congress merely resolves itself into
question of endurance. The United
States retaliate; Canada retaliates. 1t
affects both Of the parties to this child's
play TO their disadvantage. Ii subjects
both TO commercial restrictions, and
what is worse the results are quite as
likely to operate more injuriously to the
United States, which already has seri.
Gus wrongs to redress, than TO the in
terests of the Dominion, which has less
to lose than her neighbor.
1t strikes us that this Is a poor way
TO reach the real issue. 1t is not bust
ness.llke. If A commits trespass on
the property of Il and robs his water
melon patch, 1t Is not going TO help b
very materially TO retalate by invading
the property of \ and laying waste his
peach orchard. His natural course
would be TO stand guard over his
watermelon patch with a shotgun, If
there were no redress possible in the
law.
So In the case Of the Canadian out.
RACES. If no satisfaction can be had
by negotiation, the epropcr policy would
be TO send naval squadron to the
Nova Scotlan coast for the special pro.
lection of our fishing fleet with in
siructlons TO capture and destroy the
enemy wherever found infictlng VIC
lence upon American rights. Retalla.
tion carries no intimidation with It;
but reprisals by sea would soon work
awbolesome change In the high.handed
methods Of the Canadian authorities.
The better and ultimate way to settle.
ment, however, will be found through
an international commission. AS Gen
eral Wolseley said the other day. the
whole controversy could be amicably
settled In q week by two men. Our
statesmen at the Capitol apparently do
not think so. They bluster, but they
declare no war. They loudly COM
plain, but take no measures TO enforce
their demand for reparatien. They
simply proceed to bite off their own
noses by instituting a policy of non.
intercourse, to which Canada, without
being In the slightest degree scared,
will respond In kind; and they ignore
the great fact that the only ultimate So.
luton of the misunderstanding is to be
found in thorough reconstruction of
our present unsatisfactory, inconsistent,
and, in some respects, obsolete, treaty
relations.